I don't believe I could write anything on this thread that would "clarify" anything for you. My words might or might not fall on deaf ears in such
a case, but I'm going with the former of the two.

So if I'm translating this correctly, you can't or won't clarify your earlier statements. Is the tank empty mate? Whatever the case, if you truly
believe in what your saying, and your position is strong, you should be able to back it up and clarify. Unless of course, you weren't really saying
much in the first place.

IRM

It doesn't take much to translate what I'm saying there. I'm not going to repeat myself about it. You may make of it what you will and translate it
however you want to. If you cannot get any of my themes than this thread just isn't for you.

I note your refusal to clarify your ambiguous replies to myself & other members of ATS.

Therein lies the duality to which you allude.

On the one hand.....

There are members who post threads with the proactive, positive intentions of engaging in a courteous, useful dialogue with members who post in their
threads.

On the other hand.....

There is you.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

My replies are ambiguous only in your own mind. It is your belief which states that they are ambiguous , but that is not my own belief. Why am I
supposed to argue with you? You almost assume that some law binds me in a mortal combat of philosophy to try and explain to you what you already are
putt off with.
And it's only you and IRM that you are making a reference to, not "other ATS members" as you have assserted erroneously.
My themes are not understood by either of you, and when I point this out you make the assertion that I am being ambiguous. The reality is that the
ambiguity lies within your own subjective mind, but you think it is OBjective.
This once again goes to support the themes I am offering in this thread, and you have once again provided real time evidence to support my postulates.
I am grateful for that, MMN.

I note your refusal to clarify your ambiguous replies to myself & other members of ATS.

Therein lies the duality to which you allude.

On the one hand.....

There are members who post threads with the proactive, positive intentions of engaging in a courteous, useful dialogue with members who post in their
threads.

On the other hand.....

There is you.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

I'm the one who lacks the ability to make threads that are "engaging in a courteous, useful dialogue " ?

Kind regards, you wish me, while you form non-sequiturs and demand that your subjective opinion be seen as objective truth. And Courtesy? Courtesy?
You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

That's not true. If it were true then I could see how you would be amused. Glad you get a kick out of yourself.

Also it's fascinating how you resorted to what turned out to be a failed attempt at humor after I pointed out how you had made yet another empty
argument. It is child-like, MMN, reveals your own insecurity, and clearly points to the fact that you have no desire to engage in a respectful,
courteous, and on-topic exchange.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.